I've long accused publishers of abandoning the RTS in the 2000s, but I kind of abandoned it too. Games where you need to mine more crystals and build more turrets, and, if I'm feeling sour, games that make me complain they're really about clicking on a hundred things just to stay level. Games where you peer down from your sky-throne and yell at little guys until they build a base that will produce more and better guys, who'll go out and kill your rivals and blow up their base. Today we're considering the descendants of Dune 2, Starcraft, and Total Annihilation. Game taxonomy is irrational and esoteric, let's not get into it. Let's start with clarification: yes, 'Real-Time Strategy' technically includes all manner of games, from Europa Universalis to RimWorld. Why do I think it could have pushed the trireme out further? Is it possible to make a modern RTS that captures the best of the classics without simply rehashing them? Has it even been done already and gone unrecognised? We've needed an RTS revival for ages, right? And this one is good, if a bit safe.įor the last few weeks I've been puzzling over the lingering feeling that it could have been more ambitious. Lukewarm praise, perhaps, but it seems to be doing well, and that makes me glad.

It's been a few weeks since I came down on the side of basically liking Age Of Empires 4. This is The Rally Point, a regular column where the inimitable Sin Vega delves deep into strategy gaming.

Sims 3 into the future robot scanning